

.35^ 



HOLLINGER 
pH8.5 

MILL RUN F3-1543 



E 423 
.B35 
Copy 1 



PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE—SLAVERY— CALIFORNIA. 



SPEECH 



HON. W. V. N. I^AY, OF MJSSOUIU, 

IN Tlili HOUSE 01-' RICPRIvSKNTATIVKS, FKBRUAIIV --u, i-.d, 

In CommiUee of the Whole on the state of the Union, on the Resolution referring the 
President's Messttqe to the I'urions Slnntling Committees. •) t\ , / i'^-^ 



Mr. BAY (iddres.sed the Commiitcc aa fullows: 

Mr. Ciiaiumam: 1 believe, .sir, il will lie gener- 
ally coticetltd, that diirinjj ilic vurious di.scus.sions 
which have been s;oinj: on tVoni lime to lime since 
the commencement of the session, cluirncteri/.ed 
by no little degree of wnrnuh and feelfn^, I have 
manifested as little inclination as any member upon 
this floor to enter the arena of debate. I am not 
one of those who believe that the frequent dis- 
cussion of exciting subjects is calculated to pro- 
mole the public good. Upon the contrary, thry 
too often result, as the history of the jmst conclu- 
sively proves, in creating sectional feelings and 
sectional animosities, difficult to lical and hard to 
subdue. Yet, sir, I am free to admit, that it is the 
imperative duty of the Representative to make ujion 
all suitable occasions a candid and explicit aviwal 
of his opinions upon all subjects involving the pub- 
lic interests, or upon which he may be called to act 
in his representative capacity. With a view, then, 
of defining my position upon some of the promi- 
nent questions agitatuig the pul)lic mind, 1 propose 
to sulimit a few remarks; and if, in doing sn, I 
shall subject myself to the charge of wandering 
from the subject more immediately under consider- 
ation^ I trust I shall find a sufficient apology in 
the example which has been set by older and more 
expeiienced members. 

The proposition to refer the President's mes- 
sage to the appropriate committees of the House 
involves the merits of the whole document, and 
presents it as a fit subject of comment. It is a 
document sent to us in compliance with that pro- 
vision of the Constitution which requires the Ex- 
ecutive to furnish us from time to time with inform- 
ation of the stale of the Union, and to suggest 
the adoption of such measures as he may deem 
expedient. Long usage, however, has given it 
an additional importance; r)r it is .supposed to 
foreshado»v the policy of the Administration, and 
to point to such measures as the party in power 
deem necessary to the prosperity of the country, 
hence the avidity with wtiich it is sought after by 
the American people, and the criticisms so univer- 
sally passed upon it by the American press. 

Probably no document was ever looked for with 
more interest than this, growing out of the fact 
that the Executive had never figured in political 
life, had no settled opinions upon many of the ex- 
citing questions of the day, and that the country 
was entirely in the dark in regard to the policy he 
designed pursuing; and here permit me to say, by 
way of digression, it is the first time in the history 



6"V' 

of our Government — a Government relying for its 
support ufjon the intelligence and wisdom of the 
people — that an individual, without ever having 
bestowed a thought upon it.s complicated ma- 
chinery, without any definite opinions upon ques- 
tions connected with its administration, has been 
elevated to tiie chief executive chair. It is the 
first time in the history of our Government that 
the theory has been boldly advanced, that the 
man who has spent his day.s in the field and the 
camp is belter qualified to stand at the helm of State 
than the man who has devoted liis life to the study 
of political economy. 

But it also derives some importance from the 
fact that the Executive and Legislative Depart- 
ments of the Government occupy antasoiiistic 
positions, an event that seldom occurs, and which 
must be traced to the circumstances surrounding 
the great contest of 1848. I do not propose to 
discuss the merits of that contest, for that would 
be foreign to my purpose. I simply desire to give 
what, in my humble opinion, is the cause of this 
conflict between two separate and distinct depart- 
ments of the Government. To do this, I must of 
necessity refer to some historical facts connected 
with the admission of Texas into the Union. That 
she was at the time of her application for such 
admission a free and independent power, formally 
and officially acknov/ledged to be such by the 
principal nations of the earth, no one at this late 
day pretends to deny. That after her admission 
she became entitled to all the rights, privileges, 
and immunities guarantied by our Constitution to 
the States composing this Confederacy, is equally 
clear and indisputable. Her history, both before 
and after her admission, is clothed with the deep- 
est interest. Her population consisted chiefly of 
emigrants from the States, who had gone with 
large and helpless families to that distant )'egion to 
seek a livelihood by honest industry. Deprived 
of the comforts of life, and exposed to every hard- 
ship, they asked nothing from th ir Government 
but that i)rotection which they had a right to de- 
mand under her Constituiion and laws. Mexico, 
considering herself aggrieved by the act of annex- 
ation, not only threatened, but actually did invade 
the territory of one of the States of this Union. 
The President foresaw the danger surrounding 
the people of Texas, that they were exposed to 
all tlie evils that Mexican cruelty could inflict, 
and prompted by ferlin^;s of humanity which will 
ever render his name dear to the American people, 
exercised the power vested in him by the Consti- 






tution and laws, and rescued thai defenceless pop- 
ulation from the hands of Mexican barbarity. 
For this he was denounced by the leaders of the 
Whig party throughout the length and breadth of 
this land. For this he was charged with waging 
an unjust and aggressive war upon a weak and 
imbecile power; with trainpling under foot the 
Constitution of his country, which he had sworn 
to cherish and protect. Yet, sir, in the very face 
of these denunciations, the Whig party met in 
solemn council, and selected as their standard ^ 
bearer in the gieat contest of 1848 the man who j 
had figured most conspicuously in the prosecution ' 
of the war, and who is solely indebted to that j 
war for the laurels which now decorate his brow. 

But, sir, the people elevated him to the Presi- 
dency, and took that method of manifesting their 
gratitude for the distinguished services he had I 
rendered to his country; they certainly tfid not : 
suppose that it would be regarded as an en- \ 
dorsement of Whig measures, or Whig policy, | 
but had good reason to believe, from the tenor of 1 
his correspondence during the canvass, that his 
administration would be conservative in its char- 
acter, and untrammelled with party obligations, 
or party interests of any kind. 

But, sir, what has been the result? No sooner 
was he installed in offica than he called around ' 
him, as his constitutional advisers, the most ultra j 
partisans of the country. The doctrine of pro- 
scription for opinion's sake has been recognized 
and piacticed to an almost unlimited extent. Men 
honest, capable, and above suspicion in point ofi 
moral character, have been hurled from office for i 
no other reason than that of belonging to the j 
Democratic party, and this too in the very face of 
the pledges, solemnly and repeatedly made, prior 
to the election. 

This is the reason, sir, that the Executive is in 
a minority in this House. The people have taken 
the matter into their own hands, betrayed and de- 
ceived, they have so constituted this body as to 
operate as an effectual check upon every and all 
attempts to fasten upon the country measures long 
since condemned and repudiated. But, sir, my 
object in rising was not to discuss the merits of 
this message, but to define my position upon the 
great question of slavery, which, in point of mag- 
nitude, absorbs every other topic. I will how- 
ever, barely allude to one proposition contained in 
the message, and against which 1 protest in the 
name of those whom I have the honor to represent 
upon this floor. I allude, sir, to the proposition 
to disturb the tariff of '4G. I have always advo- 
cated a strictly revenue tariff, and am at all times 
ready to vole for any tariff that may be necessary 
to meet the expenditures of the Government eco- 
nomically administered. You cannot adopt any 
system of tariff which will not, to some extent, 
operate oppressively upon the South and West. 
The protection afforded the North and East will 
always reconcile them to the imposition of high 
duties; but in the South and West we have no 
manufactures to foster, and consequently can re- 
ceive no equivalent for this indirect system of 
taxation 

Now, sir, what is proposed by the President? 
He recommends a revision of the present tariff, 
the avowed object of which is to provide for a de- 
ficit in the Treasury of about $1G,()00,000, which 
it is supposed will exist at the end of the present 



fiscal year; but it is obvious that the covert design 
is to establish a iii^h protective system, a favorite 
measure of the Whig party, and for the accom- 
plishment of which they spare no exertions. 

The pretext for this recommendation is fiiyolous 
in the extreme, for a debt of sixteen million of 
dollars is a mere trifle, when we take into consid- 
eration the immense lesources of this country. I 
will suggest to 'the party in power a method of 
liquidating this debt without resorting to the plan 
proposed by the Executive. • 

Let the Administration adopt a rigid system of 
economy in all departments of the Government, 
and require at the hands of every public officer a 
faithful discharge of his duty. 

Any person who will take the trouble to exam- 
ine into the manner in which the jiublic inoney is 
disbursed, will be well satisfied that at least one- 
third of the revenue of the country is squandered 
and thrown away. Men are constantly draw- 
ing money from the Treasury who have not the 
lea.'ii shadow of a claim upon the Government. I 
could mention instances where m.oney lias been 
drawn by persons pretending to have rendered 
services at the seat of Government, when they 
were three thousand miles from this place. 

Let us then abolish all sinecures, and pay out 
no more money for constructive services. A very 
large amount of money can also be saved by re- 
ducing the expenditures of the army and navy. 
The Secretary of the Navy has asked us for an 
appropriation of near $11,000,000. 1 have taken 
the trouble to ascertain the appropriations hereto- 
fore made for this branch of the public service 
during a period of ten years, commencing in 1830, 
and the following is the result as taken from the 
general appropriation bills : 

For the year 1830 $3,427,'184 00 

" 1831 2,t'8.':l,476 00 

" 1832 3,302,143 UO 

" 1833 3,468,'JOt 28 

" 1834 . . <, 3,448,073 19 

" 1835 4,1197,728 82 

" 1 83fi 6,299,822 08 • 

" 1837 6,146,462 3.3 

" 183S 6,032,136 30 

" 1839 5,460.778 64 

Total amount $44,.597,0i>6 66 

Average appropriation 4,4.59,71)0 86 

Yet the Secretary asks for an appropriation of 
nearly $11,000,000 for this year alone, i have 
not examined the approjiriations heretofore made 
for the army; but it does appear to me that both 
might be considerably reduced without any detri- 
ment to the public interest. 

I will now, Mr. Chairman, call the atttention of 
the committee to a subject which, in my opinion, 
is paramount to every thing el&e, and deniands at 
our hands that calm and mature reflection which 
should characterize every deliberative body; a 
subject which has been a fruitful theme of discus- 
sion, not only in this hall, but throughout the 
length and breadth of this land; in, fine, sir, a sub- 
ject, the very agitation of which is well calcula- 
ted to excite the fears and alarm the apprehensions 
of every patriot in the land. 1 find here the North 
arrayed against the South, and the South against 
the North, the public business retarded, and the 
wheels of government almost stopped. To us 
the people look, and have a right to look for its 
speedy and final adjustment. At our hands they 



demand, and have a right tn demand, that ti check I! admisHion into the Union, restrictions in rcgnrd to 
be pill to tliis scene of siiile and coiueiuiiin. ;- hi; domestic nohcy, without the conHcnt of the 

But who is responsibh; for this ai;iiati(jii of the ■ |ieo|ile thereof, other than n ay be necessary to 
shivery question ? Not the shivchnMintj States, | <«»m|itl her to adopt u re(iiil)Iican form of e;overn- 
for they have always acted, and coniitiue to act, , ineiit, it is folly to coniend that Buch territory is 
upon the di'lensive. The Norih h:is niMde war , adinitied upon an efpiHliiy with the other Stales. 
Ufion one of our domestic institution.s, and we are ' N„w, sir, what course did the free Stales pursue 



sim|ily repellini; your acts of asjieMHion. You 
say that slavery is an evil, and should he exter- 
miiialed. I am not prepared lo go as fui as the 
gentleman from Mississippi, [Mr. Hkowv,) and 
pay that 1 rei^ard it as a social, moral, and pdiilic.al 



upon this occasion ? In opfiosition (o the well- 
known wishc.s of the peof)le of Missouri, and in 
vi'ilniinn of the sfiirit and mcanins of ihc treaty 
of IHOU, ihey insmied u[ion lliis restriction, and 
made it a condition precedent to lier admission 



biessinii:; nor am 1 prepared lo admit that it i.s an \\ j„,o the Union. I shall not undertake lo describe 
evil; but if It IS, we alone NulTer its consequences, ,1 ,|,e stale of the f)ublic mind upon that occasion; it 



is well known, however, that the North became 
arrayed a^ainr^t lh(3 South, and the South at^ainst 



and you have no right to interfere. 

Slavery is purely a domestic institution, and of I 
no recent ori-in. It existed in this country Ion": j (he Norih'in the most deadly hostdily.and e'very- 
prior to the ailojition of the Federal Constiiution, {< thin^ seemed to portend a sjieedy dissoluiion of 
and continued lo exist in Stales that are now free i (he Union. Hut, sir, thequestmn was settled, and 
as lono;as It was profitable. When it ceased to 1 )„ its adjustment the hand of Providence was 
beasourceofprofil, you abolished It. The South j visible warding' off i he blow aimed at the liber- 
did not complain. She conceded to you the ii-ht I tjea of the people. The compromise which t?ave 
to rciculate your own m.siuutions. During Us i satisfaction lo all parts of the country, and restored 



prevalence among you, it was not regarded as a 
crime, nor was it supposed lo reflect upon the 
charai'ter or morals of your people; it was a mere 
question of profit, of calculation, of dollars and 
cents. Slaves were regarded as property, and 
subject to the same laws which governed and con- 
trolled [>roperiy. The first attem(U at the restric- 
tion of slavery was in the passajre of the ordinance 
of 17S7, prior to the adoption of the present Con- 



peace and tranquillity to the public mind, is in the 
following words: 

"Src. 8. Jliid he it further 'nacted, Th.nt in nil lln" frri- 
tiiry eedi (I l>y KraiiCe tii llie Unin-ii Ht.iles, iiiidrr llie nHine 
of Louisiana, which lies north of itiirly-six rlfjtri'cs and 
llijriy minutes north latitude, not included witliiii the lim- 
its of the tSlate [.Mi.-^sourl] conlBiiipliilid hy this .'ict, j-lavery 
and involuntary servilu^le, otiierwise than in Ih'- punish- 
ment of crimes, whereof Ihe partii-s nhall have heen duly 
convicted, shall he, and is hereby, forever |irohibiied : 



Slilution. That ordinance applied to the territory j Pi oiidcd, always, That any person escaping into the ti.ime, 

northwest of the Ohio river, ceded by Viririnia to 1 Cr";-; «hon. '^'''O'' '-'^'■'/i'=:;;*'«'^'"'^Vr:';':r:'!\?V^^ 

, ,T , „ .-.. 1 r 1^ I 1 or ICrritfirv of the Uiiiteil Stall's, such liifiitivf may hp law- 

the United States in 1 ^©4, and out ol wlucli the f„||y reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or 



States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan 
have been since organized. The part applicable 
to slavery is in the following words: 

"There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude 
in the said itrritory, otherwise than in punisliinent for 
crimes, whi'reof the party shall havi' been duly convicted: 
Proiirfo/, iilwai,s. Thai any person escaping iiito the same, 
from whom labor or scrvit-e is lawfully claimed, in any one 
of the original States, such fugitive may be lawfully re- 
claimed, and conveyed to the person claiming his or her 
labor or service as aftiresaid." 

I am not aware that the passage of this ordi- 
nance elicited at the time any particular interest, 
as it passed by a large majority, and without much 



her labor or service, as aforesaid.' 



tmv 



It was hoped and believed by the South that all 
agitation upon this question had ceased, and ceased 
forever; but in this they were deceived, for north- 
ern politicians soon resumed the agitation, and 
have kept it up until we are brought aeeconJ time 
to the very verge of dissolution. 

In speaking of the policy of the North I wish 
to be distinctly undei.stood as making no reference 
whatever to the Abolitionist, for he is a character 
for whom I entertain the most sovereign contempt. 

„^ .,„^„ ^_, „ ,.....j „ „^.. My remarks are intended to apply solely lo that 

discussion. The South regarded it as a mailer of i| parly known by the name of Free Soilers, who in 
but little importance, knowing that theclimate.soil, I their elTorts lo prevent the further extension of 
and productions were wholly unadaptcd to slave slaveiy, keep ihe public mind ma constant state 
labor, and neveranticipatedtliai.it would be brought of ferment, and overlook the rights of the South 
forward as a precedent for future legislation, li re- !] and tlie compromises of the Constitulio^n. For 
mained for Missouri to furnish the material for an i evidence of this it is only necessary to reier to the 
exciting and dangerous agitation. Missouri formed i course pursued in regard to fugitive sslaves. 
a part of the territory of Louisiana, purchased from I The framers of the Constiiution, anticipating the 
France in 1803. Among other things, it was pro- | difficulties v/hich the owner of this species of prop- 
vided in the treaty with the French Government, || eily would necessarily encounter, and with an 
that " the inhabitants of the ceded territory should I eye lo his protection and security, very wisely 
' be incor|)orated in the union of the United States, 
'and admitted as soon as possible, according to i 
' the principles of the Federal Constitution, to the i 
' enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, and im- I 
' muniiies of citizens of tlie United States." | 

Missouri then apfdied for admission into the ; 
Union, and contended that she had a right to come 
in, as Louisiana had been previously admiti'd, 
witlioul any restriction in regard In slavery. Tlie 
treaty itself, a part of which I have just read, un- | 
questionably guarantied lo lier this right; for I ; 
hold, if Congress impose upon a Territory asking 1 the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, I6ih Peters' 



provided in the 2d section of the 4th article, thai 

" No person held to service or lalior in one State, under 
the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in conse- 
quence of any law or regulation ihiTeiii, be dischara'dfrom 
such service or labor, but shall be ilelivered up on ilaiiii of 
the party tn whom siieli servi ■. or labor may bt- due.",J ^__ 

I am aware that this has been sometimes held to 
refer to afjprentices, or (lersoiis bound to labor fiH" 
a limited |>eriod, but the only construction of which 
it is susceptible, is that given to it by the Supreme 
Court of the United States in the case of Pnug vs. 



Rep., wherein Judge Story, in delivering the opin- 
ion of the court, aays: 

"It is historically well knuvvn that the clause in the Con- 
stitution 01 the United States, relating to persons owing ser- 
vice and labor in one State escaping into other States, was 
to secure to tlie citizens of'tlie slaveholdiiig States the com- 
plete right and title of ownership in theirslaves, as property, 
in every Slate in the Union into which they might escape 
from ttie State where they were held in servitude. The full 
recognition of this risht and tille was indispensable to the 
secmity of this species of property in all llie slaveholding 
States; and, indeed, was so vital to the preservation ot 
their domestic interests and institutions, that it cannot be 
doubted that it is constituted a fundamental article, without 
the adoption of which the Union could not have been 
formed. Its true design was to guard against the doctrines 
and principles prevallinijin tlie noii-slaveholdjng States, by 
preventing them from intermeddling with, or obstructing, or 
abolishing the rights of the owners of slaves. 

"The clause in the Constitution of the United States, re- 
lating to fugitives from labor, manifestly contemplates the 
existence of a positive, unqualified right on the part of the 
owner of the slave, which no Stale law or regulation can in 
any way qualify, regulate, control, or restrain. 

"The owner of a fugitive slave has the same right to 
seize, and to take him in a State to which he has escaped 
or fled, that he had in the State from which he escaped; 
and it is well known that this riL'lit to seize or recapture is 
universally acknowledged in all the slaveholding States. 
The court have not theslightest hesitation in holding, that 
under and in virtue of the Constitution, ihe owner of the 
slave is clothed with authority in every State of the Union 
to seize and recapture his slave, wlierever he can do it 
without any breach of the peace, or illegal violence. 

" The right to seize and retake fugitive slaves, and the duly 
to deliver them up, in whatever State of the Union they may 
be found, is, under the Constitution, recognized as an ab- 
solute positive right and duty, pervading the whole Union 
with an equal and supreme force ; uncontrolled and uncon- 
trollable by State sovereignty or State legislation. The 
right and duty are co-extensive and uniform in remedy and 
operation throughout the whole Union. The owner has 
the same security and the same remedial justice, and tlie 
same exemption from State regulations and control, through 
however many States he may pass with the fugitive slave 
in his possession, in transitu, to his doniicil."^ 

Here the Supreme Court emphatically declare 
that this clause in the Constitution manifestly con- 
templates the existence of a positive, unqualified 
right on the part of the owner of a slave, whicii no 
State law or regulation can control, and without 
which the Union could not have been formed, and, ' 
further, that the right to seize and retake fugitive \\ 
slaves, in whatever State of the Union they may 
be found, is an absolute, positive right. But we ;: 
are not left simply with this conslitutional provis- •' 
ion, for Congres.s, in 179.3, passed an act designed 
to put the provision into practical ojitration, the 
last two sections of which are as follows: 

" Sec. 3. ^nd be i luho enacted, That when a person 
held to labor in any of the United States, or in either of tlrt! 
Territories on the northwest, or south of the river Ohio, un- 
der the laws thereof, shall escape into any other of the said 
States or Territories, the person to whom such labor or ser- 
vice may he due, his agent or attorney is hereby empowered 
to seize or arrest such fugitive from labor, and to take him 
or hrr bef.ire any judgn of the circuit or district courts of 
the United States, residing or being within the Slate, or he- 
fore any magistrate of a county, city, or town corporate, 
wherein such seizure or arre.>t sliail b(; made, and upon 
proof to the satisfaction of such juilg<: or magistrati-, either 
by oral testimony or aflidavil taken hefoie and cerlifiid by 
a magistrate of any snch State oi Territory, that the per^on 
so seized or arrested, doth, under the laws of the Slate or 
Territory from wliieh she or In^ fied, owe service or labor to 
the person claiming him or her, it shall he the duly of the 
JHdge or magistrate to give a certificate thereof to such 
claimant, his agent or attorney, which ^Imll hi- sutiicient 
warrant for removing the sai<l fugitive lioiii labor, to the 
State or Terriloiy froin which lie or she ftcil. ' 

" Sec. 4. ^ml he it fat the.r emictcd. Thai any person who 
shall knowingly and willingly obstruct and hinder such 



claimant, his agent or attorney, in so seizing or arresting 
such fugitive from laboi, or shall rescue such fuaitive fiom 
such claimant, his agent or attorney, when so arie-sted, pur- 
suant to the authority herein given or declared, or shall har- 
bor or conceal such person alter notice that he or she was 
a fugitive from labm as aforesaid, shall, for either of the 
said offences, forfeit and pay the sum of five hundred dol- 
lars. Which penalty may he recovered by and for tlii^ ben- 
efit of such claimant, by action of debt, in any court proper 
to try the same ; saving, moreover, to the person clahninti 
such labor or service, Ins right of action for or on account 
of the said injuries or either of them." 

Now, sir, how have the non-slaveholding States 
treated those provisions; instead of carrying them 
out in good faith, they threw obstacles in the way 
of their enforcement, by inflaming the public mind 
against the institution of slavery. They are dead 
letters upon your statute book, and never have 
been, and never can be of any practical utility to 
the slaveholder. The moment the slave reaches 
territory that is free, he becoines by force of pub- 
lic opinion as indepetrdent of his master as if he 
had his deed of emancipation in his pocket. If 
pursued, he is taken into the care, and under the 
protection of Abolitionists, or land pirates, who 
bid defiance to the owner. If the owner appeals 
to the authiirities, he is frequently denied redress; 
if he attempts to seize his property, he is subject 
to mob law and violence. But the people of the 
North say that this course of conduct is confined 
to tlie Abolitionists, and that they form but an in- 
considerable portion of the community. This, 
no doubt is true; but why do they not arrest the 
Abolitionist, and punish him for this violation of 
law; why do they not interfere, and aid the own- 
er in securing his property. If a citizen of a slave 
State goes into a free State, and forcibly takes 
and carries away the property of another, and the 
osvner of such properly pursues him, we aid and 
assist in his arrest, and hold hiiin in custody until 
a requisition is made upon our Governor, and he 
is then sent to the free State, to be tried and pun- 
ished for the oftence under laws of your own 
enactment. Pursue this policy towards us, and 
we will soon put an end to this damnable system 
of wholesale larceny. You will then liear no more 
complaints against AboUiionists and Abolition so- 
cieties, for the widow and orphan will no longer 
be robbed by these self-constituted philanthropists, 
and thrown upon the cold cliarities of the world. 
But, sir, they have not only rendered this consti- 
tutional provision nugatory and inetTectua!, but in 
some instances ha\e actually adopted legislative 
enactments, making it a felony to pursue and re- 
take a fugitive slave; in other words, legislative 
enactments subjecting the citizens of slave States^ 
who might be caught in the act of pursuing and re- 
taking their lost property, to fine and imprisoinent. 
This, 1 know, is a serious charge, but one never- 
theless true, and which can be established by re- 
cord evidence. I will cite for example a Slate 
which has pursued towards us as mild and concil- 
iatory a course as any non-slaveholding State in the 
Union, and whose delegation upon this floor, in 
point of ability and high moral worth, would do 
honor to any deliberative body in the world. 1 
refer, sir, to the Stale of Pennsylvania, whose 
Legislature in 182G passed a law, the first section of 
which is in substance as follows. 

" That il any person or persons shall, from and after the 
passage of this act, by force and violence take and carry 
away, or cause to be taken and carried away, and shall by 
fi3ud or false pref nee, seduce, or cause to be seduced, or 
shall attempt to take, carry away, or seduce, any negro or 



niulntto fnuii niiy |ir>rt ofiliis ruiiiminiwi'iillli.wiili n dcHieii 
uiiil lull iiliiiii III' M-lliii;> ami <ll-|>o.siii|; III, or i-iiii<itii{ lo liit 
8ol(l, iir of kCL'iiiii!! unci ile(ainiii)!,Mr circuii-.iii;' inbi; l(i'|iliiiid 
delaiiii'il, such iifuro or iiiulalti> as ahlavi or sirvaiit Intliii-, 
or liir any Irriii wlinlscmvrr, I'Vfiy siicli |)eisoii or ixmbihi.", Iiin 
or tticir aidi-rs or abrllors, -liali, on (•iii,vjcliiin tin ri'iil, In- 
(li'i.'iMi'il ).'iiilly of l*-l my, and shall lorlrii and |iay itMlin noi 
li-ss tlinn liv(; hiindri'd, nm inorc than orjr (lion-ainl dullais. 
And inori "Vi'r, shall ho >i'iiicnoi'd lo iiniliruonsi'iviindc lor 
any tirni or tcniis of yearn not Ii-hs than si'Vi-n yi'ars, nor 
exi-t'i diM<: Iwrnty-niit; yL'urs,and Khali he conlincd and kept 
to liiuil lahor, fi-c." 

Mr. THOMPSON, of Pennsylviuiin. TImt 
stntiitf! relrt'es lo kidnuppiiiij. 

Mr. BAY. The e:i'Mtli'itii\n fr.>m Penii.sylvnniu 
is misiaken; for if he will exnmiiie the ri\8c of l^'ifi!; 
vs. the Commoiiwcfiiih of Pciin.syivaiiia, lo which 
1 have referred, lu; will luui that uiiiici- thi.s very 
si«lutc ti citizen of Marylaiul, who had piir-sued 
and retaken n fuijiiivc slave in the Stale of Penn- 
sylvania, was arrested, indicted, and convicted, and 
would have snfl'ered the penalty of (he law, but for 
the interference of a hisjlier judicial tribunal. He 
will akso find that the jury rendered a special 
vcrdiit settiiiij out the fact that it was in proof 
before them that the property rescued was a hlave 
for life, and that the defendant was fully author- 
ized and empowered by the owner to arrest him. 
I have not examined the cf)des of other State.s, Init 
I take il for fci'an'ed that if Penn.sylvania would 
permit such a law to tjo upon her statute-book, it is 
hardly probable that a Slate like Vermont, whose 
incendiary resolutions are upon your table, would 
be far in the rear. 

Mr. SWEETSER. Does the gentleman from 
Missouri mean to say that such a statute exists in 
Ohio ? 

Mr. BAY. I have not examined the statutes of 
Ohio, but am informed that a similar law has ex- 
isted in that State, and I believe there «i"e l^ut few 
iion-slaveholdmg States but what have at some 
time enacted laws containing; similar provisions. 

I will now, Mr. Chairman, come down to a 
later period — to the time of the introduction in this 
House of the proposition of the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania, [.Mr. Wilmot,] universally known 
by the name of the IVilinut proviso, and which re- 
ceived, with some lionorable exceptions, the entire 
vote of the North. The time and method of its 
iniroduction were in cliaractcr with the proposi- 
tion itself. We were engaged in a war with the 
republic of Mexico, and the nation was looking 
anxiously to tlie government to bring it to a 
speedy and honorable termination. To accom- 
plish this, and to enable the President to conclude 
a treaty of peace, the appropriation or three mil- 
lion bill was introduced, and this proviso was 
offered as an amendment. The two measures con- 
tained separate and distinct propositions, in no 
wise connected, and bearing no affinity to each 
other. One was lo produce peace; the other agi- 
tation. One was to bring about a reconciliation 
between two sister Republics; the other to engen- 
der strife, discord, and ill-feeling among our coun- 
trymen. One was patriotic; the other mercenary. 
The proposiiion, as originally introduced, is in the 
following words: 

" Jlnd he it further enacted, 'i'lial tlicre shall be neither 
slaviry nor i'nv ihnilary serviimle in any territory on the 
conlJMi'nl of Anieriin which shall hi/rfiafter br- arqnired liy 
or annexed to the United States, except I'or crimes vvhereot' 
the party sli.ill have been duly corivicteil : Provided itln-ayx, 
That any person escaping into su h territory, from whooi 
labor or srrvice is lawlulty c laiini d in any one of the Uni- 
ted Slates, sucli fugiti\c may b' lawlully roclaiined anil 



ennvi-yed nut of mid Territory to the person i liiining liix 
or hi-r I d)or or Kervioe," 

Now, sir, I am at n loss lo know what right 
the oiitiior had to anticipate un acf|nisition of ter- 
ritory; but admitting it to be true that he had every 
reason to believe that the policy of tlie Govern- 
ment was lo claim territory as an indrninity for 
I the ex|)ense.s of the war, sundy the South hnd as 
I much right as the Norili to participaie in the 
benefits of that territory. Who, sir, when the 
tcK'Nin of war was sotinded rushed to the bailie- 
field with more arilnr and belter hearts ihaii the 
1 gallant sons of the South? Who more than they 
I contributed to the honor atid glory which that con- 
flict shed upon our national arms? Why then 
[ dcjirive them of the fruits of their victory ? Why 
' prohibit them froui cmigraliii? to a country which 
ihcy have conquered and snl)dued ? For it certainly 
I amounts to a prohibition if you interdict slavery 
I and prevent tiiem from removing wiiii iheir prop- 
' erty. If the South had insi.-'ted upon an amend- 
; ment to the appropriation bill, declaring that 
slavery should exist in all territory acquired by 
our Government, itceriaiidy would have given the 
North just ground of complaint against the South. 
1 If, then, the policy of estal)lishing slavery in the 
I territory by legislative enactment would afford a 
just ground of complaint against the South, cer- 
tainly the opposite policy of prohif>iting il would 
afford equal ground of complaint against ilie North. 
We ask no advantage of the North, but desire to 
be placed upon an equal footing with her. We 
are opposed to all legislation upon this suliject, and 
contend, that the people of the Territories when 
they ask admission into the Union should be per- 
mitted to determine for themselves whether sla- 
very shall or shall not exist among them. This 
is the only ground upon which this vexed ques- 
tion can be settled, and any other policy would be 
in direct conflict with every principle of riirht and 
justice. What more, then, can the North ask at 
at our hands unless they intend that we shall con- 
cede everything, and they nothing? 

Another objection to this proviso, and one, to 
my mind, unanswerable, is, that it proposes to 
legislate for a people who are competent to legis- 
late for themselves. It never has been and never 
can be the policy of our Government to inter- 
fere with the local or domestic institutions of a 
State or Territory. It is true that the ordinance of 
1787 was applied to the Northwestern Territory, 
but that Territory was at the lime unpeopled. Not 
so, however, with the Territories of California and 
New Mexico. They contain a large and intelli- 
gent population, chiefly emigrants from the Slates, 
and who are as capable of regulating their own 
local afTairs as the people of any State in this 
Confederacy. It is our duty to furnish territorial 
governments for all territories not containing a 
sufficient population to warrant their admission 
into the Union; but all matters of private and local 
legislation should be left with the territorial legis- 
lature, who certainly have a better knowledge of 
the wants and necessities of the people than we 
can possibly have. Our Government is a govern- 
ment of limited powers, deriving its existence from 
separate and distinct sovereignties who have entered 
into a compact for their mutual benefit and pro- 
tection; and it certainly is not and never can be its 
policy lo exercise any power which the people 
themselves are competent to exercise. 



6 



A^ain it is universally acknowleds^ed that after 
a Territory is admitted into the Union as a Slate, 
even with the proviso attached, the people have a 
riijht to prohibit or introduce slaveiy at their 
pleasure. If this be true, which no one doubts, 
then the e fleet of the proviso is to forestall ])ublic 
opinion by enrouraging emigration fiom the free 
States, and excluding it from'the slave States, for 
it unquestionably amounts to an exclusion if you 
impose upon the southern emigrant a condition 
which he cannot comply with. In other words, 
it is e.vercising indirectly a powir which can- 
not under the Constitution be exercised directly, 
and is incompatible with tlie character and stand- 
ing of our Government. -But I am happy to say, 
Mr. Chairman, that I believe a better feeling is be- 
ginning to prevail among some of our brethren 
of the North. Several of them have voted with 
us at this session against the Wilmot proviso, 
and manifest a disposition to cultivate friendly 
relations with their brethren of the South. Several 
of their leading papers have taken open ground 
against northern as well as southern fanaticism, 
and against the Wilmot proviso, and all kindred 
measures, aiid evince a determination to put an 
end to this sectional strife and discord; one in par- 
ticular, the Pennsylvanian, is rendering good service 
in this respect, and the country will owe a debt of 
lasting gratitude to its gifted and talented editor, 
J. W. Forney, for the noble and patriotic stand he 
has taken in behalf of the American Union. 

Much has been said, Mr. Chairman, during this 
discussion, in regard to the application of Cali- 
fornia for admission into the Union. I regard the 
debate at this tune as somewhat premature, as no 
bill is yet pending for such admission, and prob- 
ably will not be for some time to come. When, 
however, the question comes up in a tangible form 
I shall give my views upon it at length, and shall 
disclose the policy which will govern my vote. It 
may be well enough, however, as the subject is 
beginning to excite some mterest, to devote a few 
iTiinutes of the time allotted to me under the hour 
rule to its brief examination. 

Many objections have been urged to her admis- 
sion by gentlemen representing extreme southern 
States, none of which, in my opinion, are enti- 
tled to much weight. It is contended, in the first 
place, that there has been an unwarrantable inter- 
ference on the part of the Executive connected 
with the mission of Mr. King to that country. 
This probably is true, and if true subjects the 
President to censure; but it certainly should not 
operate to the prejudice of the people of Cali- 
fornia, and divest them of any rights which they 
would otherwise have; for no one pretends that 
Mr. King exercised any influence in the form- 
ation of licr constitution. He did not reach San 
Francisco until after the Issuing of Riley's procla- 
mation, and was not within one hundred and 
thirty miles of Monterey during the deliberations 
of the Convention. Moreover, I am informed by 
gentlemen who were members of tlie Convention 
thai ttie object of his mission was not known, and 
that no communication, either verbal or written, 
passed between them. Indeed, it was supposed 
by many that he had been sent out by the Presi- 
dent to collect information in regard to the mineral 
and other resouices of the country. 

With respect to the proclamation of General 
Riley I feel no hesitation in saying that I believe 



it was an unwariantable assumjition of power, and 
as evidence that it was so viewed by the peof)le 
of California, it is only necessary to state the fact 
that they disregarded all of his recommendations 
except those relating to the time and place of the 
meeting of the Convention. 

Aeain, it is contended that the people of Cali- 
fornia had no ri^ht to frame a constitution withotit 
the previous assent of Congress. In ray opinion, 
this power is inherent in the people, and does not 
depend upon the will of Congress; and in this 
opinion I am confirmed by almost every prominent 
statesman of the South. We have also numerous 
precedents recognizing this right. Ark msas, 
Florida, Michigan, and many other States met in 
convention, framed their constitutions, and were 
admitted without any previous legislation on the 
part of Congress. 

It is true that this objection was raised against 
the admission of Arkansas, but upon the final pas- 
sage of the bill, nearly every southern Senu<)tor, in- 
cluding Mr. Calhoun, voted for her admission. 
The following was the vote: 

VEAS— Messrs. Benton, Brown, Buclianaii, t.vLHonu, 
Clavtnn, Ciillib'rt, I^winc of Illinois, Evving of Ohio, 
Grundy, Hendriclv, Elill, Ilutilrard. Kim nf Ali-.lianiii, King 
of Georgia, Linn, .McKt-nri, Manjiim, Moore, M'lrris, Nich- 
olas, Niles, Preston, Rives, Roliinson, Rubles, Shipley, 
Taliniad!;e,Tipion, Walker, White, and Wni;ht— 31. 

NAYS— 6. 

At the last Congress, Mr. Berrien, of CJeorgia, 
one of the ablest^ constitutional lawyers in the 
country, made a report to tiie Senate, in which he 
assumed the ground, that although Congress may 
(not that it is indispensable) provide for the as- 
sembling of a convention; yet it is the will of the 
people, expressed in that convention, which alone 
creates the State. The following is an extract 
from his report: 

'■Tlie power conferred by the Constitution on Congress 
is lo admit new States, nut lo create thcni. According to 
llit^ theory of our Government, the creation of a State is an 
act of popular sovereiafiity, not of ordinary legislation. It 
is liy the will of the people of whom the State is composed, 
assembled in convi ntion, that it is created. Covg,rcss may 
provide for the assembling of a convention, hut it is the will 
of the people, e.vpres-ed in ihatronvention, which alone cre- 
ates the State ; and. until that is done, the power conferred 

by the Constituti >n C(Migress, 'to ailinit new Slates' into 

the Union, is not calh d into exercise. There is nothing 
upon which it can operate. In the opinion of the commit- 
tee, then, this hill ought not to pass, because it proposes the 
exercise by ■ on r ss of a power not verted by the Consiilu- 
lion in the National Legislature, namely, the creation of a 
new Stafe.^' 

Authority upon authority can be adduced, going 
to show that the previous assent of Congress has 
never been considered essential to enable a Terri- 
tory to form a constitution preparatory to her ad- 
mission into the Union. It is alleged also, as an 
additional objection, that persons were permitted 
to vote upon "the adoption of the constitution, who 
were not strictly entitled to the exercise of the 
elective fianchise. I do not know upon what au- 
thority this charge is made, as we have no evi- 
dence of the fact before us, and it would be unrea- 
sonable to require us to presume the existence of 
tlie fact charged, in the absence of all testin;ony. 
If it has reference to that portion of the po|iulation 
who owed allegiance to the Mexican Government 
prior to the war, it is easily answered by referring 
to the treaty of Gaudalupe Ilidalgo. 

By the eighth article of the treaty, it was pro- 
vided that all the Mexican citizens who should re- 
main in the territories ceded by Mexico to the 



United States, after a year from the date of the ex- M 

chaiii;e of ratirtcations of the iriMty, without hav- [ 
ing declan'dililifir intciiiini) to icimii tlie character 
of Mexicans, should be consideruil to have cU-clcd 
to become citizens of the United States, liy the 
ninth article of the same treaty it was siipulutcd 
that all such citizens should be iiicor[)oratcd into ' 
the Union of the United States, and be ad(niited at 
the |iro|ier time (to be judged of by the ('on^;rcss ' 
of the United Slates) to the enjoyment of all the 
rights of citizens of the United Stuten, according , 
to the principles of the Constitution; and in the ' 
mean lime should be maintained and protected in 
the free enjoyment of their liberty ami properly, 
and St cured in the free exercise of their religion I 
without restrictio;). 

But if ynu reject this vote, and all other votes I 
alleged to be illegal, it still leaves a larj^eand over- 
whelming majority of the people in favor of the 
constitution; for out of 15,()UU votes polled, but | 
little upwards of 801) were thrown ngainsj it. 

The objections, Mr. Chairman, to which I have ' 
referred are not, in my opinion, very seriously ' 
cnteriaiiied, but are resorted to for the pur|)osf; of 
concealing the real cause of opposition, a cause ' 
which, if openly avowed, would subject gentlemen \ 
to the ciiar^e of gross inconsistency. I allude, sir, 
to the prohibition of slavery by her constitution. 
I have already said that slavery was a domestic 
institution, and that the people of the Territories 
had a right to determine for themselves whether it 
should or should not exist among them. This 'I 
doctrine has been always advocated by the Demo- '[ 
cratic party of the South. It is the doctrine of ; 
NON-iNTERVEMTioN. Aiid HOW for the )M00f. '\ 

Amons the resolution.^ introduced in tlte Senate 
by Mr. Calhoun, in 1847, is the following: 

ResoUid, 'I'liiit it is a fimduiieiital principle in our politi- 
cal creecl, that a people, in toriiiiiig a tonsUlDlU'ii, liave the 
uiicotidiliunul ri^lit to ruriii and adupt the guvuriiineiit 
which Iheyiiiay tliiiik best calculated to secure tlieir liber- 
ty, prosp«rity, and happiness ; and, in confonnily thereto, 
no other condition is iinposol by tin; Federal Constitution 
on a State, in oider to be admitted into this Union, except 
that its constitution shall be ' repulilit-an ;' and that the im- 
position ol any ollii-r by Congress would not only be in vio- 
lation 01" the Constitnlioii, but in direct contiict with the 
principles on which our political system rests." 

In a State convention of the Democratic party 
of Georgia, held in 1848, the following resolution 
was unanimously adopted: 

'• Rc<ijlvc:l, Thiltlie pt-'ople of the South do not ask of 
Congress to establish the institiilioii of slavery in any of the 
territory that may be acquired by the LTniti-d Stales. They 
simply require tiiat the iiihabiiaiiLs of each territory shal! 
be left free to deterniiiie lor themselves whether the insti- 
tution of slavery shall or jhall not form apart of their social 
system." 

In the last Baltimore Convention a minority 
rcporl was made from the Committee on Resolu- 
tions, signed by W. L. Yancey, of Alabama, 
John C. McGehee, of Florida, and J. M. Com- 
mander, of South Carolina, in which they con- 
tended for this doctrine, and recommended to the 
convention the adojnion of tiie following resolu- 
tion: 

'• Rciolvcil, That the i)«ctrine of non-interference with 
the rights ol property of any portion of the people of this 
Confederation, be it in the Stales or in the Territories, by 
any other than the pnrlies interested m them, is the true 
republican doctrine recognized by this body." 

The Daily f^iiio?!, of this place, which is regarded 
as the true exponent of southern rights, published 
an editorial as late as in February last, from which 
1 have taken the following extract: 



"The ."-'outli denirs Ihni Con'resH hn* .-inv Jiirisilieiion 
ovr iIk! .-nlijeet of ^lavery, and conli'hd^ Ihni (he pi-jjile of 
tiie 'l\iiLtonei atjne, when they frame a con-iiiiiiioii, pre- 
paratory to udnii>.--ioM Into the L'iiiiin,/iui'e u rt:;ht to tpi.uk 
muiheheuTil outh.U mutter. 'I'hi-. fact being «ellli'd, it rally 
««n« t) n« tlmt this ciritiifi mettion mi^lil hr niietd'ly ailjuiteil, 
if ealui C'HiiineM prevail, 'i lie Hoiitli eonlendHlor liei lionor, 
and for the ((real priiiciplesi ol iion-inlervennoii and HtJttK 
e(|iiality. I»7ii/, thni,iiiiuiut nil iinili;Hiiil )• rinit C-ilifoinin 
to cainciitlii ItieUiiioA its 'OOii ivulie umfrauie <t cuii\lituliun1 

Then, ni rdiiii! to the doelriiies winch prevail on b'llli Hides 

of .MaHoii and Dumi's line, she may consmutionally e^lsb- 
liOi her domi'Stic iii-litUlionN on any ba-l> ( oiiM-tenl with 
re|>ublieaii priiielpb.s. Tlf Soulli coultl tjj« njCtiii,' by 
<nf );)Miis this ciuric. On the contrary, she wouUl \avt nil for 
irhich shfcjntenih.'' 

The General Assembly of theState of Misaouri 
also adopted a resolution at their last scs.sion, in 
the following words: 

"The rit;hl to prohibit slavery in any territory lle1on^'llez- 
eln-tvrlv lo Ihe people thereof, and can only be exereiiied 
by llieiii III loriniiig ihi.'ir i-nnftilulioii for a Stile guverii- 
iiieiit, or in their sovereign capacity m an independent 
Stale." 

Now, sir, I hold that no southern man can op- 
pose the admission of California into tlie Union 
upon the ground that she has prohibited slavery, 
without incurring the charge of manifest incon- 
sistency. Her constitution is strictly republican, 
and in my opinion will compare favoral)ly with 
any State constiiution in this Confederacy. It is 
also manifest to my mind that it expresses the 
opinions and wishes of the people of California, as 
it was adopted by the Unanimous vote of the Con- 
vention — a Convention consisting of forty dele- 
gates, thirty-six of whom had been citizens of the 
United Stales, sixteen from the slaveholding 
States, and twenty from the non-slaveholding 
States. 

I should have been better pleased if her consti- 
tution had been silent upon the subject of slavery, 
and left it as an open question for future adjust- 
ment; but that is a matter for the people them- 
selves, and not me, to determine. I shall vole to 
curtail her boundaiics, as I believe they call for 
too much territory, and too much sea-coast ; and if 
we do not limit them now, I shall advocate some 
measure providing for their future curtailment. 
But California must come into the Union. Her 
admission is demanded by the public voice, and 
there is no moral power in this Government tha 
can Ueeji her out. 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, permit me to 
ask, what do gentlemen of the North, who con- 
tinue to. advocate the Wilmot proviso, expect to ac- 
complish by pressing this question upon the 
South.' California, by the solemn voice of her 
people, has already adopted a constitution exclu- 
ding slavery, and is now knocking at the door of 
this Capitol for admission into the Union; and in 
ft!l human probability New Mexico and our other 
acquisitions \ ill do likewise. What, then, is to be 
accomplished but agitation, and thai of the most 
dangerous kind, threatening the very existence of 
this Republic' Do you wish to force us to the ac- 
knowledgement of a principle degrading !o our peo- 
ple, and subversive of every principle of justice.' 
Is your object to oppress the South: If so, let 
me remind you that oppression drove our fore- 
fathers to arms and resistance; oppression caused 
Hungary to draw her sword against one of the 
most powerful nations of Europe; and oppression 
will break this Government into us many frag- 
ments as there are Stales and communities. Is 
your object to exhibit, in a spirit of vanity and 



8 



selfishness, your numerical strength upon this 
floor? If so, then you arc actunted by dillVrent feel- 
ings from those which jioveruf d our forefathers in 
their early and solemn deliberations. When they 
met to form the Constitution under which we live 
thev met in asjiirit of conciliatioti and forbearance. 

They represented dirterent view.s and different 
interest.s, and it was only liy conipromiseand con- 
cession that they succeeded in devising and adopt- 
ing a system of government which has done more 
to promote the happiness of man, and to elevate 
his moral and political condition, than all other 
goverriiiicnts known to the civilized world. I had 
the honor to receive a copy of a s[)eech deliverc d 
some lime in February last by the distinguished 
gentleman from Virginia, on my right, [Mr. Mc- 
Dowell,] which 1 perused with much pleasure, 
and from which, with his permission, 1 will take 
the lilioity of making a .single quotation. In 
speakiiiir of the compromises of the C-'institution, 
he remarked — 

" Look away, sir, from all that yon know of ilu: external 
history of the Constitution— from all thai ycm liavc ever 
read of tlie opinions, suzyestion.s, and siatenicnts of its 
frainers; turn your eye inward upon llic instrnment itself; 
run It over liiiebyline; count up all of its provisions, anil 
coMi'ROMi.-!K is the one outstaniliiic and eharaeleristic fea- 
ture wliieli i.s indellibly stamped upon every page of it." 

How true this is. Scarcely a section of that 
sacred instrument can you read without being 
forcibly impressed with- the fact that conciliation 
and forbearance, concession and compromise, are 
its corner-stones; remove these, and this fabric of 
human wisdom falls to the ground. 

I call, then, upon my brethren of the North, if 
they w^ish to preserve this Government in its origin- 
al purity; if they desire to perpetuate the liber- 
ties of the people, to desist from all further aggres- 
sions upon the South. It is the appeal of one who 
is ardently attached to this Union, and who will 
stand by it in the hour of peril. Think not, sir, 
because I have stood up here vindicating the rights 
of the South, that I am capable of harboring a 
thought thai even savors of dissolution. When, 
sir, I so far forget my duty to my country, and 



my God, I pray that this arm may be severed 
from the body, and my tongue may be made to 
cleave to the roof of my" mouth. But, sir, the fact 
is not to be disguised, and 1 warn my countrymen 
of it in lime, lh;it a bold and fearless attempt is on 
foot to disscdve this Union. A few years aao no 
man dared utter a sentence uptm this floor which 
would afford even a pretext for this charge. Now, 
half of the primed speeches which you find upon 
your table, di.scour.se upon its value and probable 
termination. Instead of appealing to the consiitu- 
lioiial tribunals of the country, disunion schemes 
arc proposed, against which 1 enter my solemn pro- 
test as a representative of the people. I am will- 
ing to unite with my brethren of the South in all 
pe';\ceful and constitutional means of redress; but 
when they require me to lay a ruthless hand upon 
this fair fabric of human liberty, bequeathed to us 
by our forefathers as a sacred inheritance, we part, 
and part forever. Sir, what is this Union, and 
who can estimate its value.' It is a compact entered 
into by independent States, for their mutual aid 
and protection. It is the foundation of our 
Government, and the great pillar upon whifh 
rest the safety and happiness of this people. By 
it we have risen from weak and feeble colonies, 
to the most powerful nation on earth. By it 
literature anil the arts and sciences have pro- 
gressed beyond the expectations of the most san- 
guine votaries of freedom; and if we pass this 
crisis, the most perilous in our history, what mind 
is capable of contemplating our future greatness 
and destiny. I hesitate not, then, to say, I am for 
the Union, Wilmot proviso or no Wilmot proviso. 
I should regard the passage of the proviso as a 
»reat evil, but one which sinks into insignificance 
when compared to the destruction of this Confed- 
eracy. If then, sir, the conflict must come, and 
the 'Union is to be the battle-ground, I, for one, 
will plant myself upon the Constitution of my 
country; and if I fall, I will fall, in the language 
of a distinguished Senator, "With my country's 
flag wrapped around me, crying — To the rescue; to 
the rescue." 



Printed at the Congressional Globe Office. 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



011 893 054 2 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011898 054 2 



%> 



